Good news for sellers.

[ittybitnot]

If you don't feel like taking your own pictures and writing your own description...not to worry.  Just use someone else's on eBay.  Its ok now, and no longer a policy violation.  

See today's Weekly Chat.  The first post is from the user that is having issues with photo thieves.  See message #3. The second is the first reply from ebay staff, see message #8 that says and message #22 that says:

"I understand that many sellers invest large amounts of time and money into their listing photos and this is a great practice for their businesses. While we no longer consider it a violation for another member to use your photos, you do have the option of messaging the seller and asking them politely to not use your photos to see if they would be able to choose an alternative. Keep in mind, they are not violating eBay policy if your photos have been used on the site, so this should be framed as a friendly request if you choose to contact them. "

https://community.ebay.com/t5/Weekly-Chat-with-eBay-Staff/Community-Chat-May-8-1-00-pm-PT-General-To...

This seems very contrary to providing a great buyer experience:  Show them Item A, and ship them Item B.  We have been wondering why, even if a seller becomes a Vero member, their complaints go ignored.  Next thing we know all the sellers of CCC will be using photos of the REAL thing in the name of (insert your word of the day) consistency, efficiency .  

Quotes from the discussion:

"As for our adjustment to allow for photos posted to eBay to be used by any seller, this was introduced as a part of our focus on product based shopping and...."

"Allowing our sellers to utilize photos that match the product they are selling creates consistency and efficiency within our platform, allowing for a better experience overall. "

Good luck with this, be you a buyer or a seller.  I do not see this as a "good thing" whatsoever.  I look at it more that ebay got tired of dealing with it, so made it OK to do and no longer against the rules. 

[berserkerplanet]

>>As for those stealing sellers photos, you can still file a DMCA take down notice, as U.S. copyright law still protects
>>your work, even from ebay. If they refuse your request, you then have the right to sue ebay, that's the law.

I believe the terms of the eBay user agreement give eBay rights to any content uploaded to their servers - and they exercise those rights by allowing anyone access to that content.

https://www.ebay.com/help/policies/member-behaviour-policies/user-agreement?id=4259#9.%20Content
https://www.ebay.com/help/policies/listing-policies/selling-policies/intellectual-property-vero-prog...
https://www.ebay.com/help/policies/listing-policies/images-text-policy?id=4240

A DMCA take down notice would not be in good faith under these circumstances as the copyright holder assigned rights to the images when they were uploaded.

I'll break out the popcorn and eagerly watch the proceedings if someone tries to sue eBay over this. IANAL, but my read on it is that you'd have to invalidate that clause in the eBay user agreement to get anywhere, and that seems unlikely.

[darkeyedman]

I believe about a year ago ebay requested sellers remove watermarks from their photos. It was obvious then that there policy was going to allow unfettered use of photos by other sellers.

[luckythewinner]

---

@ittybitnot wrote:

For example, supposed you are selling used tennis shoes.  I come along and just snag your photos for my used tennis shoes.  Its ok to do now.  Buyer is none the wiser that the shoes I am selling are not the shoes they are going to get.  If you see no problem with this, that is fine. That is why we have discussions. 

---

eBay has very plainly set the rules here that a seller who misrepresents his items will not last long due to the cost of returns and higher fees.  

As a buyer, have you actually been disappointed by a seller using a picture of a different pair of used tennis shoes?

Or is this just a theoretical exercise? 

[mam98031]

I'm certainly sorry this policy has caught you off guard.  I remember how I felt when I read the update to the UA a few years back when they included this.  There was lots of chatter on the threads about it.  It was in an effort to support the Ebay catalog.  They also didn't want us watermarking our pics so that anyone could use them as well.  All this was happening around the same time.  

I know it is upsetting, but it isn't new.  It's been like this for a few years now.

[popeye3165]

I have been fighting the scammers using my Robert Kline art descriptions for years now and guess what eBay does instead of helping ME, eBay helps make it easier for the scammer to plagiarize my listings. Brilliant!

Yet I can't sell my extra printer cartridges due to copyright infringement.

[fashunu4eeuh]

---

@mam98031 wrote:

I'm certainly sorry this policy has caught you off guard.  I remember how I felt when I read the update to the UA a few years back when they included this.  There was lots of chatter on the threads about it.  It was in an effort to support the Ebay catalog.  They also didn't want us watermarking our pics so that anyone could use them as well.  All this was happening around the same time.  

I know it is upsetting, but it isn't new.  It's been like this for a few years now.

---

Hi Mam, I beg to differ. The wording in the Images and Text policy was altered around March of this year. Until then, using another seller's pictures not included in the catalog was still considered a policy violation. There was a link in the body of the policy for a member to follow in reporting the infraction. It clearly stated that a member should not use another member's material  without permission-- unless it was found in eBay's catalog. I remember this because I had been helping a newbie with that policy, and had studied it so I could advise them. Then, like within a day, it was changed.

Ironically, it still states that sellers should not use pictures copied from sources like the internet because it could be copyright infringement. But I do understand what you are saying. Ebay has been moving in this direction for awhile. However, this Image and Text policy change is new.

[clu3]

Since all listings are permanent GTC now, perhaps the solution for used, vintage, antiques is to stamp a watermark of the GTC listing number on your photos.

"As for our adjustment to allow for photos posted to eBay to be used by any seller, this was introduced as a part of our focus on product based shopping and...."

"Allowing our sellers to utilize photos that match the product they are selling creates consistency and efficiency within our platform, allowing for a better experience overall. "

[gamersbaystore]

Don't know where you got your information but ebay's terms of service do NOT override federal copyright laws. Whether you uploaded the content yourself or not is irrelevant, ebay has no rights to any images uploaded here according to U.S. federal laws.

If I create an image and upload it anywhere on the web, I still retain the full ownership rights to that image, and I can legally demand that image be taken down.

[ersatz_sobriquet]

---

@darkeyedman wrote:
I believe about a year ago ebay requested sellers remove watermarks from their photos. It was obvious then that there policy was going to allow unfettered use of photos by other sellers.

---

There was a lot of talk about that on this board. Ebay then reversed their position and  allowed watermarking. 

[sharingtheland]

I've seen many sellers put small signs or something in the background of photos with their ids or store names.  Many are cleverly designed and inserted so as to avoid the supposed slap that comes from doing that.

[berserkerplanet]

>>but ebay's terms of service do NOT override federal copyright laws. Whether you uploaded the content
>>yourself or not is irrelevant, ebay has no rights to any images uploaded here according to U.S. federal laws

Sigh. When you contractually share rights to the images the subsequent use is not unauthorized.

>>If I create an image and upload it anywhere on the web, I still retain the full ownership rights to that image,
>>and I can legally demand that image be taken down

Not if you transferred usage rights to another party, which you do by uploading them to eBay per the eBay user agreement. If a random third party with whom you have no agreement, on Youtube for example, uses your image in a non-fair-use context, then DMCA applies.

You are arguing that you can authorize use of an image by an entity (whether for free, for 1¢, or for $1000) and then DMCA them and/or sue them for copyright infringement.

DMCA and copyright laws are for UNAUTHORIZED use of IP.

[my-cottage-books-and-antiques]

ebay's terms of service do NOT override federal copyright laws, that's true. But berserkerplanet is correct: What they do is COMPLY with them. Copyright laws PERMIT the assignment of copyright, and that is what you are doing, per ebay's terms of service, when you list here.

[honestabe411]

It never technically was against policy at all. Ive had buyers steal my photos AND copy and paste my description...called eBay multiple times and was always told, "there's nothing we can do unless you are a part of Vero." So technically it never was against policy, at least not enforced.

[mr_lincoln]

@ittybitnot   Great post and good topic ...

eBay wrote: "...While we no longer consider it a violation for another member to use your photos, you do have the option of messaging the seller and asking them politely to not use your photos to see if they would be able to choose an alternative. ..."

... like that's going to happen ...

[gamersbaystore]

Your argument makes no logical sense and does not reflect copyright laws in the U.S. You're just making this stuff up as you go along. Usage rights are something granted by the copyright holder, and they can be revoked at any time. You clearly don't understand copyright laws. ebay only has the right to use your images for as long as you permit them to.